Saputello

It is not easy, but he must strive for a complete understanding of the entire sound landscape. He must take great care in learning the instruments, but not in an academic and rigid way. Today's technical obsessions can only harm the compositional discourse. He must free himself from any dogma or preconceived idea. One does not compose with a harmony manual at one's side (this many should understand).

For me, today we are literally overwhelmed by the legacy of music from the past. From Bach to Pink Floyd to Miles Davis to Ellington and Brian Eno, and so on. You can hardly find an artist who is even remotely capable of matching the artistic personality, genius, and innovative ideas of the great musicians of the past.
In my opinion, today’s musician must be a humble worker who toils in every way possible to carry on a musical discourse that seems to have been interrupted for quite some time. And let me explain. They must be incredibly well-prepared in everything: they must strive to know as much as possible about all musical genres, from Metal to classical, from jazz to new age.

Now I will write down a couple of considerations that I had made in the past regarding today's artist:

"I have a penis," I agree with your nickname and partially with your opinion on art, which I find a bit confusing, pretentious, but muddled by a pseudo-grandiloquent language that gives you power, there's no denying that.
-"We're losing our senses, damn it, only structure, damn it, more stuff for architects than for artists, but can we understand that the spark of inspiration is something that can't be subjected to the claustral confines of little professors, whether by profession or as a pastime?? When the reckless desire to express oneself is coupled with the ambitious gnawing of communication, the vicious circle of contemporary aesthetics is established: an exhausting search for an audience summoned to endure such persistent exhibitionism, logically corresponding to the desires of market politics." Here you are absolutely right, but frankly, I don't quite share the examples, citations, and contextualizations with the masses and the market that you made...

I can't vote for him because I've only heard two or three songs. But from what little I've heard, I can say that Johnny wasn't doing well. And judging by how he sounds in the latest albums, he hasn't recovered since.

A shooting star: Billy Sheehan (you forgot a 'h'), one of the best bassists around. Go tell that in the tapping altar boys' forum, thanks. "I really like how he sounds, he's technically a phenomenon," one might say, but in terms of sound, musicality, composition, and style, he is fortunately surpassed by many others.
Then I would like to distinguish between "great guitarist" and "great musician." Sure, he's a great guitarist, a technician, an entertainer. Unfortunately, he is not a good composer and arranger.

Also today to us faithful to the pink music has been given bread. Let us return it to our debtors without being induced to make another review of the pnk floyd!!

Peace and goodness, o delicate and modest brothers. This month, also give the eight per thousand to the church, which helps the poor to eat and the rich to stuff themselves...

Now two years of waiting have become too many; soon the bands will have to churn out one (crappy) album every three months, like a factory. An absolutely flat album. I preferred silence. The review is more useless than a broom in the desert.

You're right, Mark. But it's part of my nature to never do things perfectly.